Elaine's Neighborspace

List of housing approved or built in Palo Alto since 1997.

Monday, April 14, 2014

For an updated version of this list see http://paloaltohousing.blogspot.com

Housing Development in Palo Alto

Our city government is projecting a Palo Alto population by 2030 that is lower than the 80,000 assumed by ABAG (Association of Bay Area Governments). Our population now is a little over 60,000. But these projections determine the amount of housing increase that will be allowed.

The city has a Comprehensive Plan that permits moderate growth, but the plan has been circumvented in two ways. First, the City undercounts projects by a method I'll explain in a bit. Second, the City has approved hundreds of residential units more than the plan permits, even by their own count. The City was supposed to approve only 2,400. (See also an earlier message, below the table.)

My housing table below shows over 3,700 units that have been built, or are expected to be built in the foreseeable future. I ran it by the City's Planning Department and they kindly marked it up to show the differences between it and their records. I appreciate their doing this, and it led to my understanding of how the undercount works.

Here's how it works. The City only counts units both approved and built during 1997-2010. So if a project was approved before 1997 but built later, it isn't counted. For example, the Alma Place low-income development was built in 1998 but approved before 1997, so its 106 units are not counted. Other projects have also crossed that time boundary.

The City also doesn't count a project if it is approved during 1997-2010 but will be constructed after 2010. That means it can approve many developments now, as long as the developer agrees not to build before 2010, and so it isn’t counted. It is possible we will see a building boom in 2010 that will dwarf what is going on now.

Below is the updated housing list, including a column showing projects the City isn't counting under the current Comprehensive Plan.

Palo Alto just can't say No to new residential development.Every project that comes before its governing bodies waxes poetic about its own virtues, the city brushes a tear from its eyes, and says OK. And the numbers keep growing. But the consequences of this building spree to the city's already-overstretched infrastructure are serious.

Why does it matter?

In 1998, following a long and involved process, the city adopted a Comprehensive Plan which is "the primary tool for guiding the future development of the city." (pg. 1)

The Plan’s Environmental Impact Report’s (EIR) established that Palo Alto could absorb 2,400 new housing units during the period 1997-2010. If it exceeds that number, the city must adapt [before approval] to the impacts the increase would cause - to schools, parks, traffic, and to that elusive quality of life we value.

We’re In a Terrible Fix...

Recently, serious concerns have been expressed about classroom shortages, traffic congestion, crowded parks and libraries. Parents don’t like having to transport their children across town daily. Some families bought a home near a school so that their children could attend it.

Neighbors are impinged upon when permission is routinely granted to exceed the zoning height limits, reduce setbacks, and reduce required light planes (design rules that protect a home from interference with daylight.)

Many projects ask for, and receive a DEE - a 'Design Enhancement Exception' which is invariably applied to making a structure bigger. There’s no room for irony when big money is involved.

Below is the current list of housing projects which I compiled from numerous sources. For projects not yet under construction, I used their projected numbers, which sometimes change modestly during the planning process.

Just When I Oughta Say Nix!

By my count, almost 4,000 new residential units have been built, or are well along in the planning stages, even though the City’s Comprehensive Plan says the city can only absorb 2,400. Nothing in the approval process is slowing down, in fact, complaints by developers about how long it takes has sped it up.

This list does not include Stanford housing projects, individual homes, commercial properties, or projects that have not yet applied for approval, or been revealed to the public. Sheri Furman kindly assisted in organizing this material. I appreciate receiving any corrections or omissions.